RE: [ebxml-dev] gorilla hair vs. beach balls

I agree, pronouncing big words is a great way to get business people to agree with you - mostly because they don't know what they mean but are afraid to admit it ;-) Once you leave the room, though, they won't even bother to file it away (I believe the cliché "In one ear and out the other" is appropriate here.) In the end, whether the project goes or not will have very little to do with these words.

I tried to sell a JMS project a few months ago and was very surprised at how little weight words like "guaranteed messaging," and "transaction" carried with that audience. In the end, the solution they chose ignored these principles entirely, not because the business didn't need them, but because I did an inadequate job of selling them.

If you live in an organization where throwing out big words backed by highly technical concepts is enough to sell a project then you are luckier than a lot of us (Are you hiring?)

That is my experience, and, of course, yours may vary.

Regards,

Adam

-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Jacques Dubray [mailto:jjd@eigner.com]
Sent: 17 June, 2002 15:44
To: 'Adam Sroka'; 'ebXML List (E-mail)'; 'ebXML-dev List (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [ebxml-dev] gorilla hair vs. beach balls

I can assure you that it takes no more than 50 seconds to explain the differences between ebXML and web services at any business people from CEO to business analysts. You just have to pronounce a few words: non-repudiation, guaranteed message processing by the receiving application, in addition to guaranteed message delivery, transactional protocol, …

I would argue that it takes much more than an hour to explain developers why web services are not enough.

My 2 cents and real life experience.

JJ-

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Sroka [mailto:AdamS@rewardsplus.com]
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 3:23 PM
To: ebXML List (E-mail); ebXML-dev List (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [ebxml-dev] gorilla hair vs. beach balls

I agree with Scott's assessment below, but with one caveat: I don't think that web services are that much easier to define or to describe to a non-technical person than ebXML is. Rather, I think that web services have been sold very well by some very influential salesmen. I have used the term "web services" to sell projects within my own organization, because it has become one of those buzzwords that causes the ears to perk up on pointed haired bosses with titles that start with "C." However, in those same conversations it has become apparent to me that if I asked for a definition of "web services" from each of them the answers would all be different and none would be right.

In order for ebXML to have the same momentum that web services have it would have to be sold by the right people, articles would have to appear in all the boring business magazines that pointy haired bosses like to read, and pointless metaphors would have to be created such that they could be abused in boardrooms everywhere. I don't know that that will ever happen. It is unfortunate, too, because ebXML would certainly do a lot more for most organizations than web services would. Don't get me wrong, web services are great, but in terms of the real value they add to a business I don't think they're all they're cracked up to be.

I have attempted to sell ebXML to business folks, on occasion, and the best explanation that I was able to get across was something like: "It's like EDI, but with XML and web services." Obviously this is a description that anyone on this list (Myself included) could tear apart in a second, but it makes sense to the audience, and is close enough to the truth to keep me from feeling dirty ;-) The problem with this explanation is that it is hard to see where the added value comes from. That, IMO, is why ebXML is hard to sell, because in order to understand what makes it great you have to get under the hood, and the moment you do the pointy haired bosses start snoring.

Thanks,
Adam

-----Original Message-----
From: Beach, Scott [mailto:Scott.Beach@goodrich.com]
Sent:   14 June, 2002 13:25
To:     'colin adam'; 'Duane Nickull'; 'Jean-Jacques Dubray'
Cc:     'ebxml org'; 'ebtwg-bps@lists.ebtwg.org'
Subject:        RE: [ebxml-dev] gorilla hair vs. beach balls

The crux of the issue... IT managers "think" they understand the concept of
web services (whether true or not). Major mainstream vendors are pushing
web services(IBM,BEA,Microsoft, etc) as the future of web interactions, not
ebXML (not that the two play exactly the same role anyway). I've yet to see
anyone capable of explaining ebXML to an IT executive without taking an hour
and taking the conversation to such a technical level that the executive
becomes lost in the details and stops caring. Does ebXML "define" more than
web services? Absolutely. Does this make it easier to sell as a concept?
Absolutely not.

ebXML simply lacks an "elevator speech" that is compelling to IT executives.
Web services doesn't suffer from this same marketing paralysis. Another
case where better technologically doesn't correlate to more successful.

-----Original Message-----
From: colin adam [mailto:colin.adam@webservices.org]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 1:17 PM
To: 'Duane Nickull'; 'Jean-Jacques Dubray'
Cc: 'ebxml org'; ebtwg-bps@lists.ebtwg.org
Subject: RE: [ebxml-dev] gorilla hair vs. beach balls

Duane,

Interesting choice of title for a news posting. Please give me a chance
to respond before you jump to conclusions.

Anyway, I think we misunderstand each other. I see web services vs ebXML
as asking this question...

Does a person who wants to set up a b2b exchange think about a web
services based solution or an ebXML solution. I can see projects where
one of the other would be more suitable. But I would certainly consider
both in some circumstances. On the ground I think this is happening.

But before you get annoyed at this statement please consider how we both
define web services. I use it as a term to refer to soap, wsdl, uddi and
all products broadly based on those protocols also. The ws-i.org I would
say is a "web services group" etc.. blue titan's mission critical
network products is a "web services product"...

Generally since ebXML uses standards above the core three, I see them as
a separate entity. Connected but separate. I would call a ebxml product
an "ebXML product", not a "web services" product. This is just my
opinion and I believe the general community opinion.

From what I see there seems to be a general split in the industry
between "web services" products (things that use the protocols above)
and those that use ebXML. A web services product is for example an IDE
that lets you create web services like VS .Net etc..

So, the wrongs and rights of a poll that uses these terms is a
discussion, but is that the discussion we are having here..

Or are we saying that on no basis can there ever be any competition
between an "web services" product or and "ebxml product"...

Finally, please understand webservices.org is my own private website,
run off my own server, previously was a blog for my interests in soap
but has recently attracted some sponsors to help with running costs, and
I have no connections via jobs to any companies involved with web
services and have never worked for web services journal.

I work hard on my site, and ask that you only take a few moments to
consider my views and perspective. (this goes to all the flames I seem
to have received this afternoon also).

Regards
colin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Duane Nickull [mailto:duane@xmlglobal.com]
> Sent: 14 June 2002 17:38
> To: Jean-Jacques Dubray
> Cc: 'ebxml org'; ebtwg-bps@lists.ebtwg.org
> Subject: [ebxml-dev] gorilla hair vs. beach balls
>
>
> Jean-Jacques Dubray wrote:
> >
> > Webservices.org is running a poll about ebXML vs WS. Cast you
opinion.
> >
> > http://www.webservices.org/index.php/poll/result/27
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>
> I can't believe someone actually started a poll on this subject.
>
> I posted the following:
>
> This poll is seriously flawed. Let me set the record straight on a few
> thing.
>
> A Web service is paramount to an interface to a programmatic function.
> Since most OO programming
> today uses the concept of classes, most code that exists has an
> interface to send information our and
> receive a return type back from the class. Web Services abstracts the
> communication to a
> programmatic class one step further by communicating to the class by
> using XML over SOAP (which is
> really HTTP with some XML extensions).
>
> ebXML, on the other hand, is an infrastructure that facilitates
> interoperability between electronic
> business users. ebXML will probably be largely implemented using OO
> techniques and methodologies. It is
> therefore quite conceivable that ebXML could easily be implemented as
a
> set of web services, although
> it is probably not logical to do so with the current state of WS
(WSDL)
> given lack of thread tracking,
> reliable messaging and security. There is alos an added burden of
> network lag for each call to a logical
> piece of work.
>
> This poll is seriously flawed and will probably hurt both WS and
ebXML.
> I would urge it to be taken down.
>
> Maybe replace it with a poll of gorilla hair vs. beach balls - a
similar
> comparative study.
>
> Duane Nickull
>
>
> --
> VP Strategic Relations,
> Technologies Evangelist
> XML Global Technologies
> ****************************
> ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS.
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.ebxml.org/ob/adm.pl>

----------------------------------------------------------------
The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS.
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.ebxml.org/ob/adm.pl>

ebxml-dev message